E.M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Division of Family & Youth Services
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BRYNER, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
E.M.’s parental rights to his young son B.M., an Indian child, were terminated on May 28, 1996. Superior Court Judge Larry D. Card found that B.M. was a child in need of aid (CINA) pursuant to AS 47.10.010(a)(2)(F). 1 Judge Card then made the necessary findings to terminate E.M.’s parental rights pursuant to AS 47.10.080(c)(3) and applicable provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act. E.M. appeals. We conclude that Judge Card’s findings are supported adequately by the evidence and affirm the termination of parental rights.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
B.M. was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Langdon v. ChampionAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
- Wright v. VickaryousAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
- N.A. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1996
- A.M. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
- NADA A. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- D.M. v. State, Division of Family & Youth ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- L.G. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- Jon S. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
- Marcia v. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
- In the Interest of W.D.H.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2001
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.